click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
ideology or some other crazy set of ideas lou: homeland security department secretary napolitano saying that she is convinced that this is not part of a larger plot that it is one instance. your reaction? >> you can't know that now. you can't. i think it is not part of an international plot. that is my hunch. i investigated cases with punches. at the time they were right, have the time they were wrong. i had to abandon a lot of punches that turned out to be wrong. you're asking me for my hunch, this is not orchestrated by al qaeda overseas. but this could very well be being done by homegrown people who were looking to try to do the same thing. or we could be all wrong and this could be some kind of other plot having to do with something that we have not even figured out yet. lou: so i infer from what you're saying that you think this is at most a small group of people working to carry out these terrorist attacks. not an individual. >> i don't think this is a major, a planned attack by an overseas group. i think it would be far bigger than what we saw if it were a planned attack. on the
janet napolitano she did not believe the federal government did not believe that the boston incident was tied to a greater plot other than the boston incident. whether it has a bigger plot, in other words, tied to a bigger organization, they wouldn't say. whether it is foreign or domestic, federal officials would not say. as far as anything they've heard chatter wise intelligence wise, before or after, that is the real mystery here. they are not hearing much at all. that is a little bit unique. usually you have terrorist groups that claim responsibility. after the "new york times" new york times square bombing you had al-qaeda claiming right away. you have no one right now. sometimes that happens but it's pretty wear. they are not hearing any chatter. they didn't hear anything before. you heard in that press conference there wasn't a specific threat on a marathon. they had normal threat assessment heading into the race they aren't hearing anything from cellphones and radio traffic afterwards. >> eric: thanks a lot. now, we're going to head back to bill hemmer. we've heard from severa
this race. we'll bring in our panel and judge napolitano, fox analyst . charles lane writer for the washington post and charles krauthammer. charles, the video and imannuals and your thoughts? >> they will have to weigh the fact they will not get a huge amount of information a lot disruptive and extraninous. i believe they released it for two reasons. the raduous of escape is large. three days and like you drop a stone in the pond and ripple affects and i am sure they have looked at video from the airports if you live in new england as i did once, the drive to the canadian border is not long and in canada it might be easy tore escape. they wanted make sure the escape raduous stase where it is and america in america can look at this . second is the problem of trying to differenteate this from other images. what they also want to do is have everybody on the scene look immediately at the brack - background which they might have dismissed to see if these two guys appears and they could get important information within hours. >> >> bret: the f.b.i. said he sat down the backpack a
've been working with secretary napolitano and find the way to provide jammers to local police. as far as those with detonators, there is no, other than having more dogs, more surveillance and that appears to what happened here. if it was a detonator, only way to stop there, if there were more police dogs constantly screening the area and, again, we, you know, when there is after-action report from the boston police department we'll have a better idea what happened, how those ieds got there. bill: yeah. understood. did you say jammers? i want to be clear on that, is that the word you used? >> jammers. yeah, jammers can be used against remote controls. bill: what would they do? >> they would prevent an ied going off. it would prevent the person trying to set it off by remote control, it would prevent that from happening. we used them in afghanistan. we used them in iriraq. bill: yeah, i asked that because apparently cell phone service and e-mail service was down several hours month afternoon. were jammers used in the boston after the attack it is. >> i'm not sure. could have been cell p
muller, attorney general holder, secretary napolitano and homeland security adviser on the attacks in boston. we continue to mobilize and deploy all resources to protect our citizens and investigate and to respond to this attack. obviously our first thoughts this morning are with the victims, their families, and the city of boston. we know that two explosions gravely wounded dozens of americans and took the lives of others including an 8-year-old boy. this was a heinous and cowardly act. given what we now know about what took fbi is investigating it as an act of terrorism. anytime bombs are used to target civilian, it is an act of terrorism. what we don't yet know, however, is who carried out the attack or why, whether it was planned and executed by a terrorist organization, foreign or domestic, or was the act an individual. clearly we're at the beginning of our investigation. it will take time to follow every lead and determine what happened. but we will find out. we will find whoever harmed our citizens and we will bring them to justice. we also know this. the american people ref
rights. here to explain is fox news judge andrew napolitano. he was finally read his miranda rights. you have to do that within 48 hours? >> theoretically miranda rights should be read immediately as soon as the person is in custody, before you ask him any questions. we don't know exactly what's happened, we'll find out, but the government told us it did not read him his miranda rights, interrogated him for intelligence, not law enforcement purposes. this is highly controversial and could affect the government's case. but at some point in that interrogation which only lasted a few hours, which apparently consisted of him writing answers because he can't speak due to the injury to his throat. at some point in that interrogation, agents, professional interrogators decided we're not going to get anywhere or we've already learned everything we can learn from him. they also have on their shoulder, breathing down their neck, so to speak, a federal rule of procedure which requires he be charged with something within 48 hours. otherwise they have to let him go. they did charge him with this comp
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)